Schiavo Pt. Four

[Ned]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

One thing we ought to do is outlaw starving people to death and substitute the so-called hot shots we saw in Million Dollar Baby.

no, the one thing we should do is bring consistency to government actions. if the government is to prevent someone who cannot contribute to society in any meaningful way from dying, then it must do so for all citizens: those in PVS, and those on Texas Death Row.

I am against the death penalty. I am also against aborting viable fetuses. I am against torturing people to death, as we saw with Terri Schiavo.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Q Cubed

One thing we ought to do is outlaw starving people to death and substitute the so-called hot shots we saw in Million Dollar Baby.

no, the one thing we should do is bring consistency to government actions. if the government is to prevent someone who cannot contribute to society in any meaningful way from dying, then it must do so for all citizens: those in PVS, and those on Texas Death Row.

There's a difference between not supporting someone who has PMV and killing someone who doesn't contribute to society.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
I am against torturing people to death, as we saw with Terri Schiavo.

Who can take you seriously Ned when you call this toture, but not what the US govt has done to it's prisoners? You are the most biased hypocritical person I have ever met.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious


There's a difference between not supporting someone who has PMV and killing someone who doesn't contribute to society.

Or menaces society such as do communists, socialists or subversives in general. We may even have to install cameras in every room to prevent subversion.

If we catch a subversive, we can try retraining. But if that fails, well the hotshot is always available.

[Kidlicious]

Communists are the most beneficial members of society. They contribute the least amount to the capitalist system.

[Q Classic]

I am against the death penalty. I am also against aborting viable fetuses. I am against torturing people to death, as we saw with Terri Schiavo.

i'm just as pro-life as you, with the exception that i quite frankly don't think it's any of the government's business to intervene in cases like Schiavo and abortion--why? because those fall under the realm of personal liberty.

The courts determined that Schiavo was all but dead. If it was wrong, then yes, it is truly a tragedy.

Only problem is, I don't think it's wrong. Yes, the brain can regenerate, to an extent, functions that it has lost when parts of it have been destroyed--which is why some people can see, even though their visual cortex is mostly trashed.

However, that requires some form of complexity--and if what I'm reading of her brain's condition is correct, she had nothing left that was complex enough to even remotely take over some of the functions of consciousness.

Add to that the fact that everything can be explained by the very nature of PVS makes me quite skeptical of your side's claims.

Also, Congress, therefore, exceeded its bounds, and the shrill denunciations of liberals, the husband and whoever else are what really helped to turn me off to your side.

As far as "torturing her to death" goes, it's a very nice piece of rhetoric, but honestly, if someone is permanently unconscious and cannot actually feel anything (evidence suggests that Schiavo was unable to react to external pain stimuli), how is that torture? Torture by its very nature requires pain to be a factor.

Were she truly conscious, with her inability to communicate with the outside world, would she not be suffering from vast mental torture of isolation?

It's a beautiful piece of rhetoric, Ned, this notion that she was tortured to death. It just smacks of sensationalism and speculation to me--and therefore, unhelpful.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Who can take you seriously Ned when you call this toture, but not what the US govt has done to it's prisoners? You are the most biased hypocritical person I have ever met.

Kid, what did I say about prisoners? I said that coercion was not torture, IIRC. If a person has a option to stop bending over at any time, there can be no excrutiating pain.

In contrast, being nailed to a cross is a different matter, just for example.

[Q Classic]

as far as benefit to society: quite frankly, i think if you're not contributing to society in even the tiniest of ways, what good are you? why don't you just off yourself?

that's quite different from saying someone should kill them--which i'm against.

but if you can't justify your existence to anyone, even yourself, why continue?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned


Kid, what did I say about prisoners? I said that coercion was not torture, IIRC. If a person has a option to stop bending over at any time, there can be no excrutiating pain.

In contrast, being nailed to a cross is a different matter, just for example.

The question is how can you believe that people volunteer for pain and discomfort.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
as far as benefit to society: quite frankly, i think if you're not contributing to society in even the tiniest of ways, what good are you? why don't you just off yourself?

that's quite different from saying someone should kill them--which i'm against.

but if you can't justify your existence to anyone, even yourself, why continue?

If you don't want to live then yeah, why live. But aren't we talking about people who want to live?

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara Yes, there is no logical reason such former people should be kept alive. It's a waste of resouces for what is in effect, a living memorial to what used to be a human being. We, however, are not solely motivated by logical, so emotions enter into the equation, which is why there shold be guidelines.

One a person enters a PVS, there is no hope of recovery. They cease to be a person. What was once there is gone forever. Even if the brain could be rebuilt, the person could never be recovered. A new person could inhabit that body, and that would open up a new can of legal and ethical worms.

The only reason to keep a person in PVS is because the family isn't ready to let go. That's not a good enough reason for the enormous wastes of resources that could be used to help others.

This is a rare moment. I agree with this post 100%, Che.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Yes, there is no logical reason such former people should be kept alive. It's a waste of resouces for what is in effect, a living memorial to what used to be a human being. We, however, are not solely motivated by logical, so emotions enter into the equation, which is why there shold be guidelines.

One a person enters a PVS, there is no hope of recovery. They cease to be a person. What was once there is gone forever. Even if the brain could be rebuilt, the person could never be recovered. A new person could inhabit that body, and that would open up a new can of legal and ethical worms.

The only reason to keep a person in PVS is because the family isn't ready to let go. That's not a good enough reason for the enormous wastes of resources that could be used to help others.

You do know you agree with the Bush law here in Texas that people were bringing up, right?

ACK!

[Bill3000]

Tub: Duh. The point in raising that is showing the hypocrisy of Bush, not that one might agree with it or not.

[Bill3000]

One more thing:

WHY CAN'T YOU DAMN PEOPLE GIVE IT UP ALREADY!?

Seriously.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Bill3000
Tub: Duh. The point in raising that is showing the hypocrisy of Bush, not that one might agree with it or not.

No, the point is that che agrees with Bush. Bush was surely a hypocrite.

ACK!